Allowed

Kaushal Maheshkumar Gupta v. State of Mah. Thr. Ps in Charge/Inspector, Ps Sita Buldi Dist.Nagpur and Another

Bombay HC20 Jan 2023APPA/39/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, allowed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, to condone a 220-day delay in filing an appeal under Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act. The delay was due to the appellant incorrectly approaching the wrong forum after pre-arrest bail cancellation. The court condoned the delay without technicalities.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 220 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Application is allowed and disposed of.

Kaushal Maheshkumar Gupta Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

1 3 appa 39.2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶3

C RIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 39 OF 2023 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2023

¶4

Kaushal Maheshkumar Gupta

¶5

..vs..

¶6

State of Maharashtra and anr.

¶7

¶8

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶9

Court's or Judge's orders

¶10

¶11

Shri Y.J. Sheikh, Advocate for the applicant/appellant. Mrs. M.H. Deshmukh, A.P.P. for the respondent/State. Shri Rahul R. Tiwari, Advocate for respondent no.2.

¶12

CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND VALMIKI SA MENEZES, J J. DATED : 20/01/2023.

¶13

Heard.

¶14

This is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of delay of 220 days caused in filing the appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It has been canvassed that initially, the applicant/appellant was granted pre-arrest bail however the same was cancelled by the Sessions Court vide order dated 14.10.2021, which is the subject matter of appeal. Instead of filing of this appeal, earlier the applicant (accused) has reapplied to the same Forum for pre-arrest bail, however it was rejected.

¶15

It is the applicant/appellant’s contention that since mistakenly he has applied before the same Forum, that is why the delay occurred, which he seeks to condone.

¶16

2 3 appa 39.2023

¶17

Learned Counsel Shri R.R. Tiwari for respondent no. 2 objected for condoning the delay by stating that the delay runs into several days.

¶18

It is a matter of record that after cancellation of pre-arrest bail, the applicant/appellant chosen wrong Forum. Besides that the matter pertains to personal liberty and therefore, without going to technicalities, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay with a view to decide the cause on merits.

¶19

In view of that the delay caused in filing the appeal stands condoned. Application is allowed and disposed of.

¶20

The Appeal be registered and numbered accordingly.

¶21

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. ______________

¶22

Heard.

¶23

Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 03.02.2023.

¶24

Learned A.P.P. Mrs. Deshmukh appearing for the respondent/State and learned Counsel Shri R.R. Tiwari appearing for respondent no. 2, waive notice.

¶25

Learned Counsel for the respondent no. 2 seeks time to file reply. Reply be filed till the returnable date.

¶26

TRUPTI SANTOSHJI AGRAWAL

¶27

(VALMIKI SA MENEZES, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)

¶28

21.01.2023 11:53

¶29

Trupti

Kaushal Maheshkumar Gupta v. State of Mah. Thr. Ps in Charge/Inspector, Ps Sita Buldi Dist.Nagpur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaushal Maheshkumar Gupta v. State of Mah. Thr. Ps in Charge/Inspector, Ps Sita Buldi Dist.Nagpur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahul @ Damdev S/O. Gunawantrao Charde and Others Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pi, Ps Mankapur, Nagpur and Another.

Rithika W/O Manish Agrawal and Another Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Nagpur Tah. and Dist.Nagpur and 3 Others

Sujit S/O Radheshyam Wadhai Vs State of Mah. Thr. Ps Ravanwadi Dist.Gondia and Another

Santosh S/O Sevaram Rathod Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Dist.Yavatmal and Another

Rajesh Govind Mandwe Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps City Kotwali, Tahsil and Dist. Amravati.

Hitendra Gangaram Ahir Vs the State of Maharashtra Thro. Ps. Ramnagar, Dist. Chandrapur